No aircraft can be granted for clearing takeoff in revenue service with an inoperative or missing engine.

In case of twins , AOG only (under FAA regulations, taking off a twin engined aircraft with one engine is illegal). Trijets and quads could to takeoff only to ferry for maintenance under special conditions and strict procedures.

The aviation world will be bored if only twins fly with commercial passengers. I love 747s

No aircraft can be granted for clearing takeoff in revenue service with an inoperative or missing engine.

In case of twins , AOG only (under FAA regulations, taking off a twin engined aircraft with one engine is illegal). Trijets and quads could to takeoff only to ferry for maintenance under special conditions and strict procedures.

You are right; I guess 71Zulu is referring to BA 744 flight from LA to London when they lost one engine early in the flight and went Transatlantic with 3 operative engines. It happened few years ago!CheersD

I have seen a 747-400 being ferried with only 3 operating engines. The fan blades were removed from the damaged engine and an aerodynamic cover was placed over the center of the engine to prevent air going into the compressor section.

No aircraft can be granted for clearing takeoff in revenue service with an inoperative or missing engine.

In case of twins , AOG only (under FAA regulations, taking off a twin engined aircraft with one engine is illegal). Trijets and quads could to takeoff only to ferry for maintenance under special conditions and strict procedures.

He was being sarcastic, referring to the BA 744 incident a few years ago where they lost an engine out of LAX I think, then carried on to LHR on 3. With passengers.

I have seen a 747-400 being ferried with only 3 operating engines. The fan blades were removed from the damaged engine and an aerodynamic cover was placed over the center of the engine to prevent air going into the compressor section.

No GE 744 have V-Pods because the engine fan are too big to be fitted in a pod for ferry. I don't know if any PW 744 operator ordered V-Pod feature.

RR : 86in , PW 94in , GE 106in.

No GE engines (-50E/E1/E2 and -80C2B series) were certified for fifth pod operation. Both GE engine types were designed to be split for (lower deck) transportation and all early 747/CF6 operators (KL, AF, LH, etc) had 74M and/or 74F in their fleets, able to transport a spare engine (no splitting required) at the main cargo deck.

No GE 744 have V-Pods because the engine fan are too big to be fitted in a pod for ferry. I don't know if any PW 744 operator ordered V-Pod feature.

RR : 86in , PW 94in , GE 106in.

No GE engines (-50E/E1/E2 and -80C2B series) were certified for fifth pod operation. Both GE engine types were designed to be split for (lower deck) transportation and all early 747/CF6 operators (KL, AF, LH, etc) had 74M and/or 74F in their fleets, able to transport a spare engine (no splitting required) at the main cargo deck.

No GE 744 have V-Pods because the engine fan are too big to be fitted in a pod for ferry. I don't know if any PW 744 operator ordered V-Pod feature.

RR : 86in , PW 94in , GE 106in.

No GE engines (-50E/E1/E2 and -80C2B series) were certified for fifth pod operation. Both GE engine types were designed to be split for (lower deck) transportation and all early 747/CF6 operators (KL, AF, LH, etc) had 74M and/or 74F in their fleets, able to transport a spare engine (no splitting required) at the main cargo deck.

This might be a stupid question, but how does an airline plan for a flight like this? Is there a 3 engine profile for flight planning?

I have twice been in the flight deck of a Tristar on a two engine ferry flight.We had removed the fan blades, and boroscoped the other engines etc, and climbed on board.There was no V1 speed. After rotate, the aircraft climbed slowly until it reached V2 and was safe. For about two minutes the aircraft would not have climbed on a single engine. But this was in the Arabian Gulf and the sea was warm The aircraft were very light, minimum fuel, no catering, no containers, no water, no cabin crew. The B744 does it much better. B744 will ferry SIN - DXB - LHR with no real problem. Except for an engine failure in SYD, BA will always 3 engine ferry a B744 back to LHR. It really saves time and money over shipping the new engine out to the broken aircraft.

So did this not go as planned, because while driving through on my way to work, I was shocked to see this plane back at PHX so soon, this time on the North side with a ground vehicle driving around the nose. Looked like maybe it’s just landed. That was at 1PM today and it’s still parked there with air stairs on the starboard side now.

LH did a TATL flight after losing an engine just after takeoff from DEN-FRA earlier this year.

Did they? I don't see any mentions in the news. Rather they did an IFSD in 2012 (on A346) when they just started their transatlantic journey; they chose to continue to Munich in that occasion (this one: http://avherald.com/h?article=452374ea&opt=0).

Indeed, the pilot talked to dispatch and they advised him to go as far as he could so he wouldn't have to dump 70 tons of fuel. Once they got to the Atlantic, conditions were not as favorable. They made it across the pond but didn't have enough fuel to make it to London, so they diverted.

The dust-up comes from the FAA declaring this unsafe, and the UK's CAA disagreeing. The pilot didn't do anything erroneous, he followed the directions he was given. It's not like he blew an engine, kept it a secret and flew a few hundred souls across the Atlantic.

Indeed, the pilot talked to dispatch and they advised him to go as far as he could so he wouldn't have to dump 70 tons of fuel. Once they got to the Atlantic, conditions were not as favorable. They made it across the pond but didn't have enough fuel to make it to London, so they diverted.

The dust-up comes from the FAA declaring this unsafe, and the UK's CAA disagreeing. The pilot didn't do anything erroneous, he followed the directions he was given. It's not like he blew an engine, kept it a secret and flew a few hundred souls across the Atlantic.

It's BA 268. 2005. Feel free to look it up. Interesting occurrence.

Can somebody remind us according to what regulation this is considered unsafe? Is a diversion required when a quad loses an engine? Is a twin required to divert when it is operating normally? What is the difference?

That’s not exactly right, either. No dispatch system in the U.K. or most foreign airlines. Dispatching is a US process. In the U.K., the crew makes the decision and consults with Maintenance as to options as part of the crew’s decision.

Secondly, the arrived in the U.K. with the planned fuel, but thought some of the fuel was unusable (trapped) due to a misunderstanding in how the override pumps work. MAN was a conservative but not necessary divert.

LH did a TATL flight after losing an engine just after takeoff from DEN-FRA earlier this year.

Did they? I don't see any mentions in the news. Rather they did an IFSD in 2012 (on A346) when they just started their transatlantic journey; they chose to continue to Munich in that occasion (this one: http://avherald.com/h?article=452374ea&opt=0).

LH did a TATL flight after losing an engine just after takeoff from DEN-FRA earlier this year.

Did they? I don't see any mentions in the news. Rather they did an IFSD in 2012 (on A346) when they just started their transatlantic journey; they chose to continue to Munich in that occasion (this one: http://avherald.com/h?article=452374ea&opt=0).

Yep,PHX-YYZ-LHR was the planned routing.But now going via BDA instead.Specially Qualified captain required for 3 engine take off only.Rest of flight can be conducted by regular line crew.Engineers thoroughly checking everything on the good 3 engines, including horoscope checks.Making sure they're all 100% before the fight home.Believe flight number will be BA9174E...?Aircraft is currently enroute BDA .